W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-bpwg@w3.org > November 2008

Re: A few more evaluation procedures for addendum to BP (ACTION-872)

From: Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2008 10:00:41 +0100
Message-ID: <491403B9.9040404@w3.org>
To: Jo Rabin <jrabin@mtld.mobi>
CC: Dominique Hazael-Massieux <dom@w3.org>, public-bpwg <public-bpwg@w3.org>

Jo Rabin wrote:
> Oh, and I am wondering if we need an additional optional section:
> Variation on mobileOK Basic Tests
> e.g. to explain that the 20k limit is for the DDC and that it is often 
> good practice to go beyond this for more advanced devices

I agree.
I think this section should be mandatory for each Best Practice that is 
covered or partially covered by mobileOK, and that a link to the 
corresponding test definition in the mobileOK spec would be a good idea 
as well.

> On 06/11/2008 17:50, Jo Rabin wrote:
>> I think this looks fine, but I am wondering which sections we are 
>> limiting the document to - I assume that we mean
>> Relevant Device Properties
>> Additional Interpretation of the Best Practices
>> Evaluation Procedure (not Test)
>> Examples
>> Only "Evaluation procedure" being mandatory, though I'd have thought 
>> that Examples would generally be useful?

I agree with the list as well, and for a strong SHOULD for the 
"Examples" section.
There may just be a couple of tests where examples may be hard to 
define, e.g TABLES_SUPPORT:


>> Jo
>> On 21/10/2008 15:45, Dominique Hazael-Massieux wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> I took an action item earlier today to provide a rewrite of a few more
>>> tests for the addendum to BP (aka BP 1.5), which I have done and
>>> inserted in Kai's latest draft, and published at:
>>> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/mobileOKPro/drafts/ED-mobileOK-pro10-tests-20081021.html 
>>> The relevant part is at:
>>> http://www.w3.org/2005/MWI/BPWG/Group/TaskForces/mobileOKPro/drafts/ED-mobileOK-pro10-tests-20081021.html#access_keys 
>>> I have rewritten access keys, auto refresh, avoid free text, background
>>> image readability, balance, with the following changes:
>>>  * used a more compact format, removing the empty "notes to bpwg" and
>>> co,
>>>  * added a "relevant device properties" item at the top of the list, in
>>> the light of our discussions on the relation of these evaluations
>>> procedures with the DDC
>>>  * reworded avoid free text, background image, and balance to recast
>>> them as evaluation procedure rather than tests
>>> (I probably would have substantive comments on some of these, but I
>>> tried to keep my changes editorial for the time being)
>>> HTH,
>>> Dom
Received on Friday, 7 November 2008 09:01:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 25 March 2022 10:09:52 UTC